RTG/their owner seems to have a different stance on the possibilities of continuing operations. I believe both forums use the same platform. Can you elaborate a bit on why you see things differently?
I can only share my own view and interpretation on the matter.
I don't see the act as any existential threat to this forum. Instead, I see it as an additional layer of expense and administration to formalise what we already do. There will likely be some adjustments required to ensure compliance—quick examples being changes to direct messaging services and the CA forum, which might no longer function as they do now due to increased risk, but I don't believe the act would prevent our operation as an Everton forum. Maybe the better question would be, why would it?
Our risk is relatively low compared to most platforms, and our moderation standards are significantly higher than the vast majority of forums out there. For instance, we don’t even allow swearing here. Practices like moderating posts from new members before they go live, robust post-reporting and action systems, and even using AI to detect toxicity (something fewer than 1% of forums utilise).
I do think the act may lead some websites to block access for UK users because compliance won’t be worth their effort. We’ll likely see “Online Safety” sections—or similar—added to the footer of every site, akin to privacy policies, with largely boilerplate text. It will demand both money and time to achieve compliance, likely even more so than GDPR did, which also generated a lot of initial concern.
[Edit] The added expense and administrative burden will lead some forum owners to give up entirely—and honestly, I can’t blame them. Especially if their starting block is much further behind GOT which would add bigger infrastructure change.
